Rightwinger Chris Chope has put forward legislation that would undermine the principle of an NHS free at the point of use.

The Tory MP for Christchurch has tabled a private member’s bill set to be the third to be debated today calling for “co-payment” for NHS treatment.

His National Health Service (Co-Funding and Co-Payment) Bill (HC Bill 37) is unlikely to be passed without his Government’s support, but it opens up for debate extending charges from prescriptions, dentistry and opticians to GP visits and even hospital procedures.

It is the second reading of Sir Christopher Chope’s bill to amend the 2006 Health Service Bill.

Last summer Chris Chope was accused of “abusing the system” by sleeping in Westminster for three nights with fellow Tory MP Peter Bone to put in 73 private member’s bills between the pair of them.

Many fellow MPs were outraged as this was seen as an attempt to block other MPs proposing legislation on Fridays which are reserved for individual MPs to bring legislation to the commons.

Labour’s Paul Flynn, who has been attempting to have his own bill to legalise the medicinal use of cannabis debated properly for years, despite attempts to talk it out of time on Fridays, accused Chris Chope and Peter Bone of “abusing the system by putting down 70 bills where there are only a certain number of slots.” The Labour MP for Newport in Wales said: “It’s destructive. It’s not helping the Commons to do its job. I think it’s made them the least popular of all MPs.”

Chris Chope has little respect for other MPs’ private members bills, waffling on with other notoriously filibustering Conservative MPs to make sure they run out of time for a vote. The incredibly irritating practice has often been criticised as being undemocratic.

In 2015 for instance, Chope helped fellow Tories Philip Davies and Davide Nuttall, who between the three of them chatted for two hours and 53 minutes to derail Labour MP Julie Cooper’s perfectly sensible private member’s bill to give carers free hospital parking.

The much respected health select committee found that the Tory reorganizing of the NHS as a marketplace cost the NHS 14% of all its budget. And with private firms encouraged to cherry pick £billions in contracts for the more lucrative functions of the NHS, today’s vote will be seen as another attempt by rightwingers in the Conservative party to undermine the NHS.

I just hope somebody gets hold of this bastard and locks him in the loo for the day. How dare he! What with that and Jeremy Hunt walking out of the HOC as soon as a question was put to him about the rise in deaths in care of children with disabilities brought boos from even his side of the House.

In some areas they are saving money by stopping stupid people from ordering repeat prescriptions when they don't need them. One used to be able to do a repeat at the pharmacy, but people were just telling the pharmacist to tick everything on the list, so drugs were being wasted. Now you have to do it yourself and take the repeat prescription to the surgery.

Raggamuffin wrote:In some areas they are saving money by stopping stupid people from ordering repeat prescriptions when they don't need them. One used to be able to do a repeat at the pharmacy, but people were just telling the pharmacist to tick everything on the list, so drugs were being wasted. Now you have to do it yourself and take the repeat prescription to the surgery.

What doctors also do with repeat prescriptions, is limit the number you can have and that you then have to have another assemement when you have exhausted the number you can have. Which means you have to then see the GP, to be able to then have more repeat prescriptions. This again is limited, and ensures that people are constantly checked within a year to ensure that medication is not wasted.

Raggamuffin wrote:The only pain killers which should be on prescription are those which can't be bought over the counter - Solpadol, for example. These should be used sparingly anyway as codeine can be addictive.

How is any of the above got to do with my point on how for not all people. In regards to your view its cheap?

Not all people can do as you think and believe, as to them its not cheap.

Take for example how and why many elderly die in winter, due to a fear of putting the heating on

An extreme example I admit, but the view you have, lacks any empathic intelligence

I have Solpadol on prescription to take as and when needed, but I don't keep on re-ordering it. A box will last me for ages. I generally take over-the-counter paracetamol from time to time, which I buy myself.

Last edited by Raggamuffin on Sun May 13, 2018 12:45 pm; edited 1 time in total

Raggamuffin wrote:I have Solpadol on prescription to take as and when needed, but I don't keep on re-ordering it. A box will last me for ages. I generally take over-the-counter paracetamol from time to time, ;which I buy myself.

But your situation Rags, should not be the stand point for everyone else. As to believe it is, fails to understand the many different situations people are in.

Its good that you can afford. That though, does not mean, that is the case for everyone else, does it?

Raggamuffin wrote:The only pain killers which should be on prescription are those which can't be bought over the counter - Solpadol, for example. These should be used sparingly anyway as codeine can be addictive.

I completely agree, some people just take advantage of the NHS, God knows how much is wasted in prescribing lots of stuff people can buy themselves cheaply.....not to mention the prescriptions that are collected free of charge and never used.

Its a pity the NHS don't often check who is claiming for free prescriptions, I'm sure plenty don't pay when they should.I am now of retirement age so I don't pay, but for years I seemed to be the only one who ever got my purse out when needing a prescription.

Large nations should be saddened that so many smaller nations beat them in quality of care.

Here's how large nations should catch up:

* Have ONE INSURER that covers every single person. When you have millions and millions of people in the same system (I.E. not the dozens of private systems in the U.S., nor the devolved systems in the UK), the cost per person goes down -- always.

Having one insurer also means more leverage against companies that manufacture medical equipment and medicine, as well as doctors, hospitals, labs, etc. It's much easier for a hospital to boss around an insurer that covers 1 million people than it is to boss around one that covers 50 million or 300 million.

* Have a sliding-scale range of fees. The rich should pay a bit more; the poor should get it for nearly free. (I know, it's not fair to the rich. It's not fair that I can't have one single yacht but some heir can have five of them; get over it.) Even having to pay a little will discourage people from just popping in every time they have an upset stomach, and that fee is also a guaranteed source of revenue.

* Consider other possible funding sources. In Texas, we use a state lottery to help fund our schools. No reason a lottery couldn't help fund medicine. Again, in a larger country, more people will be playing the lottery, so more revenue will be raised.

_________________“As man advances in civilization, and small tribes are united into larger communities, the simplest reason would tell each individual that he ought to extend his social instincts and sympathies to all members of the same nation, though personally unknown to him. This point being once reached, there is only an artificial barrier to prevent his sympathies extending to the men of all nations and races.”

Some of the countries with the most successful health care are very similar models to the British pre 1974 NHS, so I've read anyway. They just tend to spend more on it. Perhaps people having to arrange to pay into a scheme will think more about it than just paying tax direct to the government and not go to GP's with trivial things. People go to A & E because they can't see a GP a lot of the time. I don't understand the people that ring for an ambulance with a toothache and other daft stuff.I wouldn't really like to have to pay and then be re inbursed though, more bureaucracy surely.